Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

War Without End

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 134 posts

Re: War Without End

#101

Post by aalleavitch »

ptr wrote: post #77
aalleavitch wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As evidenced by the fact that the most successful modern socialist states are in Europe, I believe this is the case. Those who could make their social welfare programs coexist with aggressive Western attitudes have thrived.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_socialist_states As far as I can see, there are two countries in Europe on that list: Portugal and Greece.

If you use a definition of socialism that excludes the notion of a mixed system, yes. I would say that precisely that is the form of authoritarian socialism that doesn’t work.

Re: War Without End

#102

Post by AnthonyMouse »

mmjaa wrote: post #70
AnthonyMouse wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> But in the aftermath of WWII, I think it's not surprising that this wasn't understood. Then what's our excuse this time?

>Then what's our excuse this time? There's money in them-thar hills (of Afghanistan). War money: your nation can't survive without it.

> War money: your nation can't survive without it.

Especially when most of the money, and all the future interest on the new public debt, comes from the domestic taxpayer. Imagine all the trouble the average citizen would cause if they could spend their own money on scientific pursuits, entrepreneurship and educating their children instead of debt service. It would practically be a revolution in the making.

Re: War Without End

#103

Post by yontherubicon »

enraged_camel wrote: post #96
yontherubicon wrote: post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Citizenship has historically been defined by military service, in that you are not merely subject to the security apparatus of the state, but a part of it. Because you are a part of it, you have a say in it. It was the removal of the draft which necessarily removed the role of service from citizenship. What do people who are not a part of the military care about non-intervention? There is a reason we viliify the draf…

>>Citizenship has historically been defined by military service, in that you are not merely subject to the security apparatus of the state, but a part of it. I don't know where you got this idea. Most of the largest empires in history - Romans, Sassanids, Ottomans, British, you name it - had a professional warrior class. It wasn't all voluntary, but ideas like draft only applied to non-citizens.

Was referring to the Romans. Perhaps I'm exaggerating.

My point is that military service is a responsibility, not a chore foisted upon us. If it were, we would be subjects. But we are not subjects, we are citizens.

Re: War Without End

#104

Post by enraged_camel »

yontherubicon wrote: post #103
enraged_camel wrote: post #96

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>>Citizenship has historically been defined by military service, in that you are not merely subject to the security apparatus of the state, but a part of it. I don't know where you got this idea. Most of the largest empires in history - Romans, Sassanids, Ottomans, British, you name it - had a professional warrior class. It wasn't all voluntary, but ideas like draft only applied to non-citizens.

Was referring to the Romans. Perhaps I'm exaggerating. My point is that military service is a responsibility, not a chore foisted upon us. If it were, we would be subjects. But we are not subjects, we are citizens.

>>My point is that military service is a responsibility

Maybe when the country is being invaded. For offensive wars however I don’t know how you can argue this.

Re: War Without End

#105

Post by yontherubicon »

afsina wrote: post #95
yontherubicon wrote: post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Citizenship has historically been defined by military service, in that you are not merely subject to the security apparatus of the state, but a part of it. Because you are a part of it, you have a say in it. It was the removal of the draft which necessarily removed the role of service from citizenship. What do people who are not a part of the military care about non-intervention? There is a reason we viliify the draf…

Historically most ancient or medieval wars were fought by professional soldiers. Here is a Wikipedia quote "The persistent old belief that peasants and small farmers gathered to form a national army or fyrd is a strange delusion dreamt up by antiquarians in the late eighteenth or early nineteenth centuries to justify universal military conscription" I support Rothbard's view on the issue: https://www.youtube.com/watc…

Not what I'm referring to. I'm referring specifically to those who owned land and bore arms and were referred to as Citizens in Rome.

I find both the notions that conscription=slavery and that taxation=theft can only be held by someone who does not believe in any sort of duty or obligation to one's community, country, nation, or God, and that self-interest must necessarily be one's sole (or at least primary) motivating factor.

Re: War Without End

#106

Post by yontherubicon »

enraged_camel wrote: post #104
yontherubicon wrote: post #103

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Was referring to the Romans. Perhaps I'm exaggerating. My point is that military service is a responsibility, not a chore foisted upon us. If it were, we would be subjects. But we are not subjects, we are citizens.

>>My point is that military service is a responsibility Maybe when the country is being invaded. For offensive wars however I don’t know how you can argue this.

Is your country not sharing in the spoils? I'm not saying that offensive wars are moral, but it is in keeping with your duties to the group.

And certain offensive wars are for the common defense, usually against neighboring countries over scarce resources, or against other imperial powers.

Re: War Without End

#107

Post by aestetix »

https://www.nytimes.com/2002/09/08/world/threats-responses-i...

https://www.nytimes.com/2004/05/26/world/from-the-editors-th...

https://www.nytimes.com/2003/01/24/world/threats-responses-i...

Many more where that came from. There is a case to made that the US wouldn't even be in Iraq if not for the undying support of the Bush administration's agenda, by none other than the New York Times.

Re: War Without End

#108

Post by enraged_camel »

yontherubicon wrote: post #106
enraged_camel wrote: post #104

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>>My point is that military service is a responsibility Maybe when the country is being invaded. For offensive wars however I don’t know how you can argue this.

Is your country not sharing in the spoils? I'm not saying that offensive wars are moral, but it is in keeping with your duties to the group. And certain offensive wars are for the common defense, usually against neighboring countries over scarce resources, or against other imperial powers.

What spoils? I think it would be rather difficult to claim that the general US population has come out on top as a result of Middle East adventurism over the past two decades.

Re: War Without End

#109

Post by afsina »

yontherubicon wrote: post #105
afsina wrote: post #95

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Historically most ancient or medieval wars were fought by professional soldiers. Here is a Wikipedia quote "The persistent old belief that peasants and small farmers gathered to form a national army or fyrd is a strange delusion dreamt up by antiquarians in the late eighteenth or early nineteenth centuries to justify universal military conscription" I support Rothbard's view on the issue: https://www.youtube.com/watc…

Not what I'm referring to. I'm referring specifically to those who owned land and bore arms and were referred to as Citizens in Rome. I find both the notions that conscription=slavery and that taxation=theft can only be held by someone who does not believe in any sort of duty or obligation to one's community, country, nation, or God, and that self-interest must necessarily be one's sole (or at least primary) motivati…

No, community and state are two different things. Surely I do not accept social contract theory. But I do not think we will reach a common ground arguing this issue.

Re: War Without End

#110

Post by ataturk »

mmjaa wrote: post #94
roenxi wrote: post #93

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Crickey. I am onboard with your actual point, but consider painting the picture without such broad strokes. There are something like 320 million Americans, and their culture is an impressive mishmash of every other culture that the world has ever produced, held together by string and elbow grease. Give it a little respect, even if you do want to lay out a little of the realpolitik. "Not supporting the troops" is a co…

I care not a fig for the constitution of a culture which allows the wanton and wilful destruction of civilisation without any recourse, responsibility, or indeed care in the world. Americans, willing recipients of its treasures, have nevertheless let their military-industrial-pharmaceutical complex run rampant over the worlds "lesser nations" for far too long, and the mechanism by which they fail, as a culture, to ta…

[dead]
Post reply on HN